logoalt Hacker News

joering2yesterday at 4:37 PM9 repliesview on HN

[flagged]


Replies

kube-systemyesterday at 5:26 PM

Because intent isn't something that you can acquire from the actions of third parties

Second, the VAST majority of guns in the US sit in gun safes and closets and never shoot anyone.

Finally, shooting someone is not necessarily an illegal action -- gun manufacturers market their products for self defense or sporting reasons -- I have never seen one market their products for use in criminal acts.

show 1 reply
ApolloFortyNineyesterday at 4:48 PM

There are around ~500 millions guns in the US according to a quick Google.

There's a lot of crime in the US, but I doubt even 1% of the guns have been used in a crime.

Also you can buy a gun and just shoot it at a range.

show 1 reply
JCTheDenthogyesterday at 4:46 PM

Even the lowest estimates (the National Crime Victimization Survey) estimates annual defensive gun uses in the US at 60-80k per year. Highest estimates are at around 2 million.

But even then, most usage is at ranges, and far outstrips crime usage.

show 1 reply
clickety_clackyesterday at 4:49 PM

Statistically speaking, most guns are not used for crime, and even among uses, crime is probably small compared to military or even hunting etc.

Tuna-Fishyesterday at 4:52 PM

That's not at all what this ruling says?

To win, Cox did not need to prove that they sold their product without intent to infringe. To win, the plaintiff would have had to prove that Cox had intent. The difference in burden of proof is in practice massive.

dwedgeyesterday at 5:41 PM

This is an instance of begging the question "if the overwhelming amount of used guns are used to accompany crime then how can you argue otherwise".

But there's no substance to your premise. 400 million owned guns, 50,000 deaths a year, it's a long way from the overwhelming majority.

show 1 reply
vetromyesterday at 4:43 PM

> where overwhelming amount of USED guns are used to accompany crime

I do not think this holds up to a factual analysis if you look at any cross section of defensive gun use reports. I don't think that parts actually relevant here though. If you were to use a similar standard as the USSC court applies here: Impressions don't matter to qualify for inducement. The action must be actively invited.

show 1 reply
dionianyesterday at 4:40 PM

it would help if all cases of self defense were cataloged. Right now it only hits the stats if a crime is not averted.